Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Today our local newspaper is up in arms about the new Arizona immigration law, calling it racist and discriminatory. I wonder what they and the other news media would say if our constitution mirrored the Mexican constitution.

The following articles appear in the Mexican constitution:

Article 32. Mexicans shall have priority over foreigners under equality of circumstances for all classes of concessions and for all employment, positions, or commissions of the Government

In other words, affirmative action does not exist in Mexico and it is lawful to discriminate against any non-Mexican.

Article 33. Federal Executive shall have the exclusive power to compel any foreigner whose remaining he may deem inexpedient to abandon the national territory immediately and without the necessity of previous legal action.

Foreigners may not in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.

Under Article 33 any foreigner can be deported for any reason without any legal process!! Question, would mass picketing, demonstrations, etc. be considered participation in the political affairs of a country and subject the individual to be deported?

And to think of the hypocrisy of the Mexican President claiming Arizona discriminates!

Monday, April 26, 2010

That phrase cannot be attributed to any one particular person, but the gist of that saying gives poignancy to today’s liberal thinking of the many government policies that have not turned out the way they were originally intended. Do any government policies ever turn out the way they were intended?

Many of the social programs of the 20th Century were enacted with the intention of doing “good” for society, but after trial and error, the results have been less than envisioned by the “benevolent” people (mainly politicians) making those proposals. Feel good legislation, like trying to help the needy and downtrodden, trying to make amends for the “sins” of the past, and trying to even the “playing field” to make situations more “fair”, have, in many cases, turned out badly, much to the chagrin of the proponents of these misguided programs, but still they push on.

A perfect example of the effects of this phrase is the consequences that resulted from the enactment of President Lyndon Johnson’s “War on Poverty”. The intentions of making life more livable for the poor were honorable and compassionate, but the results have been less than fulfilling and, in many cases, downright disastrous. This was the epitome of trying to institute the “Nanny State” mentality into the fabric of our society of which the Obama Administration is now trying to complete the job. Not only has it not eradicated poverty, but it has had some very harmful effects upon some of our most vulnerable citizens. Medicare and Medicaid were setup to make life better for both our senior citizens and the poor. No doubt it has helped seniors who have or had health problems, but like most all benevolent government programs, waste, fraud, and inefficiency are prevalent in the administration of these programs. Both these programs are going broke in a few short years and in order to sustain them; massive infusions of government (our tax dollars) money will be needed to keep these programs afloat. Along with Social Security, these programs are nothing more than government “Ponzi schemes” that will come crashing down in the near future. It makes Bernie Madoff look like a piker.

The “War on Poverty” also exacerbated a problem in the inner cities by encouraging couples not to marry, thereby causing the out-of-wedlock births in the black community to approach 70%, thereby relegating many of these poor people to remain on the government dole with little hope that many of them will be able to free themselves of being dependent on the government for a handout.

Another area where good intentions have gone awry has been in the area of so-called “climate change” (global warming). Most all of us, if not all, want clean air, clean water and less pollution in our lives, but some people have perverted this cause by trying to cash in financially by purposely scaring the people into believing that more rules and regulations are needed or we will be confronted with dire environmental consequences. The pending bill before Congress called “Cap and Trade” (the word tax should be used in place of the word trade) is a perfect example of government sticking its nose into places it has no business to be in. It will raise all our taxes dramatically (it will be especially harmful in this time of economic recession) and it will put a dagger through the heart of our job generating private businesses. It is an anti-business, anti-free enterprise piece of legislation that will prolong our recession well into the future. Even if passed, it will have little or no effect upon our environment as man cannot control Mother Nature, even if a faux recipient of the Nobel Prize tells us otherwise.

Yes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, but we can bring back some rational reality in our country and in our lives by electing politicians with a strong conservative background and a philosophy of helping people to help themselves with a minimal amount of government interference. A helping hand instead of a handout is the role of a compassionate government.

Friday, April 23, 2010

The Tea Party movement is a good thing, and a nemesis to the beltway's good old boys club, who don't want it disturbed; but beware over doing a good thing.

Look what has happened by over doing the application of the first amendment. Abusing its purpose and meaning with irresponsible behavior, contributing to the decline of family values and legalizing immoral expression by the ACLU and judicial activists. It's wrong to shout fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire, and to shout,"Racist!" at Tea Party protesters where there is no racism. Reaching for another tasty cupcake and that extra glass of wine, or over indulge on other feel good things, defying will-power is over doing.

I hope this movement will take the high road, weeding out the loonies and radical liberal plants, who diminish the movement's purpose of putting our elected officials on notice that we will no longer tolerate business as usual. Their spending is completely out of hand, and it's their belt that needs tightening, not ours.

Thinking about these and other statements made by the man who wears the title of president. I keep wondering what country he believes he's president of.

In one of my very favorite stories, Edward Everett Hale's "The Man without a Country," a young Army lieutenant named Philip Nolan stands condemned for treason during the Revolutionary War, having come under the influence of Aaron Burr. When the judge asks him if he wishes to say anything before sentence is passed, young Nolan defiantly exclaims, "Damn the United States ! I wish I might never hear of the United States again!"

The stunned silence in the courtroom is palpable, pulsing. After a long pause, the judge soberly says to the angry lieutenant: "You have just pronounced your own sentence. You will never hear of the United States again... I sentence you to spend the rest of your life at sea, on one or another of this country's naval vessels - under strict orders that no one will ever speak to you again about the country you have just cursed."

And so it was. Philip Nolan was taken away and spent the next 40 years at sea, never hearing anything but an occasional slip of the tongue about America. The last few pages of the story, recounting Nolan's dying hours in his small stateroom - now turned into a shrine to the country he fore swore - never fail to bring me to tears. And I find my own love for this dream, this miracle called America , refreshed and renewed. I know how blessed and unique we are.

But reading and hearing the audacious, shocking statements of the man who was recently elected our president - a young black man living the impossible dream of millions of young Americans, past and present, black and white - I want to ask him, "Just what country do you think you're president of?"

You surely can't be referring to the United States of America, can you? America is emphatically a Christian nation, and has been from its inception! Seventy percent of her citizens identify themselves as Christian. The Declaration of Independence and our Constitution were framed, written and ratified by Christians. It's because this was, and is, a nation built on and guided by Judeo-Christian biblical principles that you, sir, have had the inestimable privilege of being elected her president.

You studied law at Harvard, didn't you, sir? You taught constitutional law in Chicago? Did you not ever read the statement of John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and an author of the landmark "Federalist Papers": "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers - and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation - to select and prefer Christians for their rulers"?In your studies, you surely must have read the decision of the Supreme Court in 1892: "Our lives and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian."

Did your professors have you skip over all the high-court decisions right up till the mid 1900's that echoed and reinforced these views and intentions? Did you pick up the history of American jurisprudence only in 1947, when for the first time a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson about a "wall of separation between church and state" was used to deny some specific religious expression - contrary to Jefferson 's intent with that statement?

Or, wait a minute. Were your ideas about America 's Christianity formed during the 20 years you were a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ under your pastor, Jeremiah Wright? Is that where you got the idea that America is no longer a Christian nation"? Is this where you, even as you came to call yourself a Christian, formed the belief that America has been arrogant"?

Even if that's the understandable explanation of your damning of your country and accusing the whole nation (not just a few military officials trying their best to keep more Americans from being murdered by jihadists) of "not always living up to her ideals," how did you come up with the ridiculous, alarming notion that we might be "considered a Muslim nation"?

Is it because there are some 2 million or more Muslims living here, trying to be good Americans? Out of a current population of over 300 million, 70 percent of whom are Christians? Does that make us, by any rational definition, a "Muslim nation"?

Why are we not, then, a "Chinese nation"? A "Korean nation"? Even a "Vietnamese nation"? There are even more of these distinct groups in America than Muslims. And if the distinction you're trying to make is a religious one, why is America not "a Jewish nation"? There's actually a case to be made for the latter, because our Constitution - and the success of our Revolution and founding - owe a deep debt to our Jewish brothers.

Have you stopped to think what an actual Muslim America would be like? Have you ever really spent much time in Iran? Even in Egypt? You, having been instructed in Islam as a kid at a Muslim school in Indonesia and saying you still love the call to evening prayers, can surely picture our nation founded on the Quran, not the Judeo-Christian Bible, and living under Shariah law. Can't you? You do recall Muhammad's directives [Surah 9:5,73] to "break the cross" and "kill the infidel"?

It seems increasingly and painfully obvious that you are more influenced by your upbringing and questionable education than most suspected. If you consider yourself the president of a people who are "no longer Christian," who have "failed to live up to our ideals," who "have been arrogant," and might even be "considered Muslim" - you are president of a country most Americans don't recognize.

Monday, April 19, 2010

That distinction becomes relevant when you read that some in the “liberal left” have proposed that their adherents infiltrate the “Tea Party” gatherings around the country and cause bad publicity, by sabotaging the movement by doing despicable acts or dirty tricks that would bring the wrath of citizens down upon the protestors as extremists, therefore eroding support for their ideas and complaints. They (the loony left) mention showing hand-made signs at the rallies that contain misspellings to show how uneducated and stupid the “Tea Party” people are, they suggest and encourage the infiltrators to use the word “Nazi” or use racial epithets to show how extreme they are etc., etc. Of course, they expect the liberal media will showcase those aberrations as being part of the “Tea Party” movement when, in fact, they are perpetrated by the liberal left thugs, in many cases the members of S.E.I.U and other goons hired by the Democrats surreptitiously. This is right out of the book by Saul Alinsky called, “Rules for Radicals”, who’s teachings were followed by Obama as he matured.

That is not “disagreement” with the views of the people who attend the rallies; it is outright, elitist “disdain” by the very people who verbally champion tolerance and peace as part of their misguided progressive dogma.

Why all the excess attention by the “loony left” toward this grassroots group that is trying to exercise their First Amendment right to seek redress from their government about big taxes, big government, big brother, big health care costs, and big deficits? Why do these advocates of “tolerance for all” fear the message these “Tea Parties” are putting forth?

My take is that the liberals can see the writing on the wall that the “Average Joe” citizen in the street protesting (not the elitist left) has hit a responsive chord with the American people. All the polls show that the Democrats are headed for a political, electoral “bloodbath” this coming November 2nd. If the trend continues, the shape of our government will be cleansed by sweeping out of office the tax and spend, budget-busting legislators who have given us a $13 trillion deficit (and rising) with no logical way in sight of how to pay it off.

The promises made by our “Narcissist in Chief”, Barack Hussein Obama and the Democratic Congressional leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, have been found to be lacking in credibility and truthfulness. It seems they all have been infected with the malady called “mumpsimus” (which I wrote about recently IN THIS EDITORIAL) whereby they continue to cling stubbornly to something that is wrong even when he/she know it is wrong. Who, with any brains or common sense, can believe someone who tells you that your taxes will not go up “by one single dime” even though you will be spending over a trillion dollars on a health care plan that is a mish-mash of non-medical political gibberish concocted to give benefits to certain special interest groups?

Of course, people or citizens should have the right to disagree with others, but when you include the verb “disdain”, and use it in your dialogue or description of others, you announce to the world that you’ve lost the argument and, therefore you must resort to the tactic of using the “politics of personal destruction” to try to overcome their lack of common sense and ethical reality. Shame on them, but then again, they have no shame!

Saturday, April 17, 2010

The hesitation and confusion exhibited by this President as he fumbled to answer even such a straight-forward reporter’s question (would he name one or two of his favorite Chisox players?), was so typical of this man’s tactic of obfuscation as to be painful.

To be fair – and isn’t that what we should all strive for in evaluating this Muslim miscreant, anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, pro-Islam, pro-Arab, pro-ThirdWorld status, nice-clean-articulate-long-legged MackDaddy and pitiful apologist for the greatest nation ever to exist on this planet – to be fair, I believe that BarackHusseinObama’s only association with baseball in the Windy City was when he was being briefed by one of his Marxist mentors about the non-existent racist aspects of the infamous 1920s Chicago Black Sux scandal.

If there was ever a switch-hitter in the White House, it is this Leftist who is never right - - except when he swings his B.S. bat.

MORT

P.S. Although proof is as scarce as his academic records, I believe this son-of-a-bitch is as gay as Barney Frank. He drinks, he smokes and he sux.Submitted by Mort Kuff

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

"Obama has blamed Bush again and again for the problems we have now. He never mentions that the Democrats (including himself for two years) have controlled the Congress and Senate since 2007. I think the "Statute of Limitations" has run out on Obama being able to blame Bush. Get real already!".

Monday, April 12, 2010

The “culture of corruption” recently lost one of its adherents with the passing of Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the self-styled “King of Pork”. His passing doesn’t alleviate the endemic problem in Wash. D.C., but it points up how pervasive the problem really is. It is one of the reasons why the public, according to recent polls, have Congressional approval poll numbers in the low teens. Besides the health care debacle, the honesty and integrity of the members of Congress will be one of the reasons why it looks like a major overhaul will occur in the elections of 2010. We must CLEAN the HOUSE!

Remember in 2006, right after the Democrats took control of Congress, Nancy Pelosi said that she was “going to drain the swamp of corruption” that the Republicans left for the Democrats. Well, how did those words turn out? It looks like dike has cracked again and the polluted water is again poring back into the swamp.

The erstwhile Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), has had his “wrist slapped” because he didn’t report that some corporations paid his way (and other Congressmen) to a conference in the Caribbean. Out of all the charges that have been leveled against him, that was probably the least damning, as the other charges of submitting false income reports to Congress, using Congressional stationery to solicit funds to erect a college wing bearing his name, his abuse of the rent-control laws of the City of New York by taking 4 apartments for his own personal use, etc., etc. Shouldn’t Nancy Pelosi have been shocked at these revelations? Of course not, she only gets shocked when a Republican is accused of malfeasance (real or imagined), like in the case of former Rep. Tom DeLay. In fact, she has come to Rangel’s defense by saying that the ethics committee said that he didn’t “violate” House rules. What does ole Charlie have to do, hold up a bank to get condemned by the Speaker? But, being the good “party soldier” that he is, he requested a leave of absence of the Chairmanship of Ways and Means until the OCE has completed its investigation. He really thinks he has done no wrong, but what the hell, neither does Nancy Pelosi. What a country?

Last spring, the House agreed to investigate 7 members of the House subcommittee on defense spending, including the now deceased Rep. John Murtha, for soliciting clients of the PMA Group (a lobbyist organization - Paul Magliocchetti Associates) for campaign contributions. According to the Seattle Times, in the 2008 defense bill alone, lawmakers gave PMA clients 172 earmarks. Everything about this arrangement smacks of the “one hand washes the other” theory of taking care of friends who take care of friends. Only it happens to be our tax money they are divvying up to buy up campaign contributions from selected clients.

By putting fellow Congressmen in charge of investigating their fellow Congressmen is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house. Nothing worthwhile will come of it and, so far, it hasn’t.

Congressional earmarks, as any rational person can figure out, is used as a fund raising tool by the Congressmen to fill their campaign coffers by directing federal funds to “worthy” constituents. They hope that in return, their largesse will be rewarded by the “worthy” constituents in the form of hefty campaign contributions which all Congressmen need to help them get re-elected. The culture of earmarks, of which there were 10,000 in the FY 2010 spending bills, will not be cancelled by the Congress because they have nothing to fear from the OCE (Office of Congressional Ethics) or from Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker.

Saturday, April 10, 2010

The “loony liberal” left inevitably brings up the canard or so-called fact that it was Democrats, and Democrats alone, who gave us Social Security, Medicare, and the Civil Rights Act, implying that the cold-hearted, insensitive, big bad Republicans were against all these pieces of social legislation and they should be condemned for their apparent lack of humanitarianism.

Well, those so-called facts are false and outright lies used to put a bad light upon the Republicans. Here are the facts:

Did you know that Social Security was passed when Democrats controlled both Congress and the White House, yet 64% of Senate Republicans and 79% of the House Republicans voted for it? More than half of the Senate Republican caucus voted for the Medicare Act in 1965. In 1964, in the House, the Civil Rights Act was voted for by 80% of the Republicans as compared with only 63% of the Democrats. In the Senate, 82% of the Republicans supported the legislation compared with 69% of the Democrats. By the way, voting against this measure were Al Gore Sr., William Fulbright, and Robert Byrd, all liberal icons.

So the next time you hear a liberal claim that only Democrats are in favor of social legislation and passing laws for the “average” citizen to make their lives better, recite these FACTS and figures and then see what they have to say.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

We’ve been told by the “loony liberal left” that America needs a “total transformation” to be led by former Community Organizer Barack Hussein Obama. What seems to be the problem?

Well, I’ve just returned from 3 ½ weeks in a foreign Latin country and believe me, there’s no place like home, right here in the good ole “evil” U.S.A. The person who wrings his hands and complain that our country is racist, out of touch, ignore poor people etc. is the same country that millions of people are dying to emigrate to, both legally and illegally. Until you see life from the vantage point of being in a different country for an extended period of time, you cannot, in good faith; bad mouth our democratic republic and have any credibility whatsoever.

The “Progressives” (the phrase becoming quite popular among the liberal left) say we are an uncaring, greedy, selfish people, but who is the first in line to offer and give support and aid to people or countries who need help after a huge calamity? Who gives foreign aid to countries who continually vote against it in the U.N.? What country (up until the present administration) gives every individual the opportunity to be a success in life if he wanted to take advantage of the opportunity? What countries “poor” would be considered middle-class in most countries in the world today (remember that picture of Michelle Obama helping out in a community soup kitchen while one of the recipients, of that largesse offered to the poor, was taking her picture on his $300 “Blackberry”?). You guessed it, that country is the good ole U.S.A. and still the detractors continue to vilify our country while championing other oppressive countries like Venezuela, Cuba etc. There seems to be a vast disconnect there as to what they are saying and what the real facts are.

Now, in our infinite wisdom, we want to stifle the greatest country in the world, the U.S.A., by giving to the government to operate what should be left up to the individual to supply to his fellow man. Instead of the government offering a “safety net” for people in need, the “progressives” want to take away that entrepreneurial spirit and arbitrarily take from the producers to give to the non-producers (by tax policies or by decree). What a way to throw a monkey wrench into the workings of the greatest, up until now, democratic republic man has brought forth in this world. Let’s hope the naysayer, the belittlers, the envious do-nothings don’t get to carry out the “total transformation” that they envision for our country.

We still have time, but we must be vigilant and support candidates to reverse this extremely dangerous policy change. We need to support and elect candidates like Lt. Col. Allen West and Marco Rubio right here in Florida. Both are young, energetic and carry with them the core conservative principles that our country needs to survive this socialist onslaught that the present administration is trying to ram down our throats. That’ll be the start of a good House and Mansion cleaning that is badly needed. Now let’s go and do it so we can continue to say “There’s No Place like Home”!

Build The Wall

BLACK LIVES MATTER KILLS PEOPLE

Bill Whittle provides shocking evidence that demolishes the Big Lie of Black Lives Matter and then goes on to explain why a lie that size needs to be told by people like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama & Loretta Lynch.

Read Numerous Quotes by Wright

Yeah but Trump said?

Obama leaves the world a more dangerous place

A Democrat Leader

Thomas Sowell Quote

Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight

The Untold Story of Muslim Opinions & Demographics

By the Numbers is an honest and open discussion about Muslim opinions and demographics. Narrated by Raheel Raza, president of Muslims Facing Tomorrow, this short film is about the acceptance that radical Islam is a bigger problem than most politically correct governments and individuals are ready to admit. Is ISIS, the Islamic State, trying to penetrate the U.S. with the refugee influx? Are Muslims radicalized on U.S. soil? Are organizations such as CAIR, who purport to represent American Muslims accepting and liberal or radicalized with links to terror organizations?

For a complete history of Chuck’s Editorials please look below the “LABELS” title and click on “Chuck Editorial”

Labels

Great Editorials by IBD

Example of why we need Term Limits

Followers

What have we learned in 2,064 years?

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."- Cicero - 55 BC

Evidently, nothing.

TERM LIMITS

Limit all U.S. politicians to two terms: One in office and one in prison.
Illinois Already Does This.
Submitted by Fred Page